'Well, we have two cheeks and it was one of them' Says Publisher : Justin Trudeau Gropes Reporter in 2000: Editorial Accuses

To me this looks like absolute crap.

These stories have more to them when they go public like this if there is substance. The fact that this is a second hand story without an accuser tells you what you need to know. The statements are only about something said out of context and nothing specific about what happened. Looks like a smear attempt and not a well performed one. Amateur.

Well, on the one hand, "If I had known you were reporting for a national paper, I never would have been so forward", does sound a little "too good to be true", in terms of resembling a Hollywood scriptwriter's idea of how an elitist scoundrel would talk. 

On the other hand, the Creston Valley Advance would have to be the absolute dregs of journalism, bar none, to fabricate a story from whole cloth, and claim that it happened to one of their own journalists.

And throw in that they decided to do this at a time when Justin Trudeau wasn't even being talked about as having any political potential, ie. prior to his "Friends, Romans and countrymen" speech at PET's sendoff.

Anyway, draw your own conclusions. Does anyone know the name of the reporter who covered the Kokanee Summit for the National Post and the Vancouver Sun? Is she the same person who wrote what seems to be an article about the festival, on the same page as that editorial?   

I don't know about this other stuff but after trying some BC bud there, Trudeau got the idea that he had to legalize weed! 

voice of the damned wrote:

Anyway, draw your own conclusions. Does anyone know the name of the reporter who covered the Kokanee Summit for the National Post and the Vancouver Sun? Is she the same person who wrote what seems to be an article about the festival, on the same page as that editorial?   

 

I was able to figure it out but apparently she doesn't wish to be identified.

So far all he is being  accused of is apologizing. The word "handling" is in scare quotes. For all we know he is jokingly apologizing for kissing her hand. Or maybe not, but as of now there is no one accusing him of anything specific so we don't know if he was inappropriate or not. 

progressive17 wrote:

Justin is definitely a pugilist. He keeps fit by boxing with certain people, a skill his father trained him. He has also worked as a bouncer. So, he is definitely capable of it.

Capable of what? A 90 year old man in a wheelchair is capable of touching women inappropriately. Of course Trudeau is capable of it. If the woman claimed he touched her inappropriately I would believe her. 

The point is no such claim or accusation has been made. There has been no investigation or finding. If someone makes a claim then an investigation should be launched. 

The National Post has taken up 5e story, with careful research. 

http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/why-an-18-year-old-groping-allegation-against-justin-trudeau-is-not-a-metoo-moment

 

Not to excuse sexual assault but back in the day, being a little forward was considered a legitimate method of socializing. Searching for the girl that didn't go 'eewww'. Trudeau was simply another beer chugger at a beer festival.

Today, a certain portion of women are castigating men for being men while men ( most of whom can't see the 'signals', never mind read them) are more lost than ever.

Why don't women (preferably women who like men) write a simple rule book to follow. A book men can understand, not a labyrinth to female approval.

Martin N. wrote:

Not to excuse sexual assault but back in the day, being a little forward was considered a legitimate method of socializing. Searching for the girl that didn't go 'eewww'. Trudeau was simply another beer chugger at a beer festival.

Today, a certain portion of women are castigating men for being men while men ( most of whom can't see the 'signals', never mind read them) are more lost than ever.

Why don't women (preferably women who like men) write a simple rule book to follow. A book men can understand, not a labyrinth to female approval.

Bullshit. If you like a woman ask her for a date. Try holding hands. If she doesn't want to hold your hand she probably doesn't want you to grab her ass or her breasts. Physically accosting women looking for  one that doesn't go "ewww" is not a valid excuse. We call it copping a feel and we shouldn't have to put up with it because men are looking for a woman drunk enough or with low enough self-esteem that she won't go "ewww". 

Men have no trouble  at all reading "signals".  If they aren't getting any it's because women aren't sending any.  Many women do have casual sex, with friends, or a classmate, or even someone they meet at a bar if they take a liking to the guy although that is much more rare. If they are interested the signals are crystal clear. Also, most women understand language. Men can ask them questions. No need to grab a crotch or an ass to find out. They could say, "Hey, want me to grab your ass? Wink wink."

Back in the day women were fair game. We were the prey, men were the hunters, and it was up to us to keep you at bay. Men were considered animals driven by their baser instincts fueled by testosterone so powerful it overcame their mental faculties leading them to lose control around enticing  women. We women had to be careful not to entice and not to be alone with any men. 

Fortunately most men have miraculously evolved to resist their baser instincts and discovered that women are people that can be communicated with through language. No need to pet us to find out if we are friendly. 

Martin N. wrote:

Good post. That's why beer parlours had a 'men's side and a 'ladies and escorts' side. I wasn't referring to making a grab at the important bits, just getting closer. 

I don't recall much if any hands on kind of stuff in my days of carousing. Maybe all this rap "music" and emotional distance caused by electronic devices is creating a divide between the sexes that did not exist before.

The divide isn't growing it's shrinking. Men have evolved as much as women have. That is why the Me Too movement has been so successful. Most men don't go around getting women dead drunk then having sex with them. Most men are not grabby and don't touch women inappropriately. Most men, when interested in a woman, flirt, or try being nice and complimenting her or asking her out somewhere. 

Pondering wrote:

Martin N. wrote:

Good post. That's why beer parlours had a 'men's side and a 'ladies and escorts' side. I wasn't referring to making a grab at the important bits, just getting closer. 

I don't recall much if any hands on kind of stuff in my days of carousing. Maybe all this rap "music" and emotional distance caused by electronic devices is creating a divide between the sexes that did not exist before.

The divide isn't growing it's shrinking. Men have evolved as much as women have. That is why the Me Too movement has been so successful. Most men don't go around getting women dead drunk then having sex with them. Most men are not grabby and don't touch women inappropriately. Most men, when interested in a woman, flirt, or try being nice and complimenting her or asking her out somewhere. 

Most men are kind and supportive and very angry at abusers and the more vocal everyone is, the less room predators have to manoeuvre, especially the power wielding kind.

Which brings us back to Skippy Trudeau, a vocal feminist since, well, forever. If he was a simple college lout in his youth, one could write him off as a dumbass and hope he grew up but Trudeau has been dining off his feminist pose for ever and the accusation, such as it is, so far, will give this story legs.

Its not so much a story of another beer- soaked lout being inappropriate at a festival as it is a university educated vocal feminist hypocrite being busted for not practicing what he preaches.

The individual needs to face his past actions but the Prime Minister needs to face the nation.

Give us your view on Trudeau so far avoiding any Me Too blowback. Is the accusation political smoke and mirrors? Is his stature unassailable or are the wolves making sure of their facts and hectoring ( enticing?) the accuser out of hiding before descending on the hapless former feminist idol?

progressive17 wrote:

Many men have been emasculated, and this also makes women more safe.

Oh no...you did NOT just say that....

Seriously?  It's "emasculation" to expect men to respect women's physical space now?

Ken Burch wrote:

progressive17 wrote:

Many men have been emasculated, and this also makes women more safe.

Oh no...you did NOT just say that....

Seriously?  It's "emasculation" to expect men to respect women's physical space now?

Yeah, to the guy sitting by himself, drinking steadily, eying the ladies and stoking his resentment at not getting any. 

You need to get out of the house more, Ken

Martin N. wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

progressive17 wrote:

Many men have been emasculated, and this also makes women more safe.

Oh no...you did NOT just say that....

Seriously?  It's "emasculation" to expect men to respect women's physical space now?

Yeah, to the guy sitting by himself, drinking steadily, eying the ladies and stoking his resentment at not getting any. 

You need to get out of the house more, Ken

In other words, to the guy who is too shy to approach women-and, full disclosure, I have BEEN that guy from time and can relate to lonliness and frustration-but what do you want?  It's not as though it would be better for men to have the right to invade women's personal space and pressure them into sexual contact.  

Easing off on the drinking would probably help, btw.

Martin N. wrote:

Which brings us back to Skippy Trudeau, a vocal feminist since, well, forever. If he was a simple college lout in his youth, one could write him off as a dumbass and hope he grew up but Trudeau has been dining off his feminist pose for ever and the accusation, such as it is, so far, will give this story legs.

"Forever" meaning after he became a politician?

feel sad for you progessive.

but really you are imposing your internalized perceptions on others.

if what you said was truly reality there would be no men brutalizing women they would all be dead.

 

Martin N. wrote:

 

​Give us your view on Trudeau so far avoiding any Me Too blowback. Is the accusation political smoke and mirrors? Is his stature unassailable or are the wolves making sure of their facts and hectoring ( enticing?) the accuser out of hiding before descending on the hapless former feminist idol? 

None of the above. Men have been cleared of accusations. I believe the woman believes something inappropriate happened but no further accusations have surfaced and the media is most certainly avidly investigating. His apology sounded like a joke to me. He is known for his dry sense of humor that can be misunderstood. Maybe he's on the autism spectrum? (Just joking) A man with half a brain wouldn't apologize saying he wouldn't have done X had he known the woman was a reporter to her face. Certainly something happened but it could be anything from grabbing her ass during a dance to going in for a kiss that wasn't expexted. Most women realize a man can get signals wrong and that some women are hyper-sensitive. The me too movement is predicated on men whose names are on the grapevine. Men whose antics are well known and may or may not be illegal but are repetitive and involve a power imbalance. 

The Me Too movement is not about men who get a little too fresh at college beer bashes nor about men who are a little awkward when expressing interest in a woman. Men saying they are afraid to compliment a woman on their appearance for fear of being accused of sexual harassment are missing the point. 

I am not saying Trudeau is innocent. I'm saying so far there hasn't been much of an accusation. The remark he is accused of making is not evidence of guilt. It sounds like he was joking. The woman in question has to be willing to identify herself to a lawyer who can define whatever it is that happened as sexual harassment of some sort. Failing that and failing multiple accusers I'm not convinced he behaved in such a way that most women would define as sexual harassment. 

Ken Burch wrote:

Martin N. wrote:

Good post. That's why beer parlours had a 'men's side and a 'ladies and escorts' side. I wasn't referring to making a grab at the important bits, just getting closer. 

I don't recall much if any hands on kind of stuff in my days of carousing. Maybe all this rap "music" and emotional distance caused by electronic devices is creating a divide between the sexes that did not exist before.

"all this rap 'music' "?  When did you turn into the "you kids get off my lawn!" guy?

When kids started listening to gangster wannabes yelling about themselves while wearing their pants in prison speak. 

 

Wow. This is energy that would be better spent on criticizing Trudeau on things he's actually done. Of which there are many. You know, investing billions in crumbling leaking pipeline infrastructure while the whole fucking planet is on fire while lying about about his nation to nation relationship with Indigenous peoples whose communities don't have clean safe drinking water, adequate housing and fair and equitable funding for education because we "can't afford it". Etc. etc. ad nauseum.

progressive17 wrote:

Emasculation happens to you irrespective of the social condition of men's and women's rights. It happens to boys, who know nothing of equality.  They are told that simply because they are boys, they are bad. They are punished for existing, not because they did anything wrong. Punishment makes the punishing authority feel good. Punishing the innocent gives the punisher arbitrary power and authority, which gives them strength. They must be punished for the sake of punishment, not because they did anything right or wrong. Their fault was coming into existence, for which they will never be forgiven.

After a while, they understand they receive the least punishment when they appear to cease to exist in the domain of the issuing authority of punishment. They do not want to exist, but they have been brought into existence by the punishing authority. Suicide is the constant frame of mind, and the only comfort. As they are always paralyzed by fear, there is no energy to commit suicide. Their suffering is the delight of the others, in all four dimensions of Minkowski space-time.

Because of the way they are made, they are incapable of standing up for themselves in any way. Any 'talking back' is met with severe punishments above the pay grade of normal existence and threats of death. This prevents them from acting as they would normally. At every turn, they are paralyzed with fear, even dealing with those who are not the punishing authority. They are no threat to anyone, and actually wish death would be delivered.

There could be an exact analogue to this for girls. I don't know if you would call it 'efeminization', as I have never heard that word before.

Still, if it causes boys not to be a threat to anyone, why not emasculate them all? They are only boys anyway. Then they will all commit suicide and the world will be a happier place.

If any of that reflects your own sense of self, you appear to be in desperate need of therapy.  None of what you wrote there has anything to do with is actually going on in the world of gender relations.  

It's not emasculation to encourage young men to respect the personal space of women.  To imply that it is is to argue that all men MUST rape and kill women.

A lot of us simply seek a BETTER manhood, a better form of male strength-a strength demonstrated without harming people and without being hyperaggressive assholes.

It's not as though the only male possibilities are marauder or wimp.

MegB wrote:

Wow. This is energy that would be better spent on criticizing Trudeau on things he's actually done. Of which there are many. You know, investing billions in crumbling leaking pipeline infrastructure while the whole fucking planet is on fire while lying about about his nation to nation relationship with Indigenous peoples whose communities don't have clean safe drinking water, adequate housing and fair and equitable funding for education because we "can't afford it". Etc. etc. ad nauseum.

I don't get it. The victim wrote the editorial and all the sisters have to say is 'move along, nothing to see here". How does Trudeau get a pass while other male pols get ruined for much less. Everybody counts or nobody counts.

I can understand that this is politically motivated but the fact remains that Patrick Brown was ruined for much less. Tell me ladies is it because Trudeau is 'hot' and Brown is 'creepy uncle'? Erin Wier gets the boot for being too tall and talking too loud while whatshername gets a pass for toy boys on the job.

How often do we get the moderator dragging a red herring through the topic - and a rather smelly red herring at that? 

Inquiring minds need to know.

 

Quote:

I can understand that this is politically motivated

I should hope.

I really don't think you're standing up for any woman.

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:

I can understand that this is politically motivated

I should hope.

I really don't think you're standing up for any woman.

Soooo not lucid. Are you mansplainin, Magoo? Or just time for a quick riposte before catching your bus?

Women can stand up for themselves, they don't need me but I need to understand why your curly-haired hero gets a pass - especially from the not-so friendly villagers of babble who sharpen their pitchforks at the slightest scent of impropriety.

why would this victim write an editorial about the incident if she was not offended? She said "grope". Where is the outrage?

Martin N. wrote:

Qoute:

"It's not as though the only male possibilities are marauder or wimp."

Not so. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Don't worry, be happy.

That statement was in response to the assertion that all males are being "emasculated" by the expectation that we should the wishes and physical space of women.